NJ Gov Chris Christie's one-year moratorium on fracking is too short

Hydraulic fracturing — or "fracking" — is a topic of concern for many New Jersey residents, especially in light of Gov. Chris Christie’s recent conditional veto on a fracking ban in New Jersey and his proposed one-year moratorium. This moratorium is too short, and does not allow adequate time to study the environmental impact that fracking could have on New Jersey’s water supply.

Proponents argue that it could bring jobs to the region, as well as be an important source of energy. While energy and employment are vital to the state’s economic health, water quality is even more important. Businesses cannot thrive in an environment lacking clean water, and residents who have already lost much in the recession will fall even deeper into property debt when their homes lose value due to contaminated water. It takes more than one year to study a watershed or an ecosystem, and the benefits of doing comprehensive analysis of environmental impacts certainly outweigh any drawback of allowing natural gas to remain in the ground.

Our water supply needs to be protected from fracking to keep the region from economic hardship and environmental disaster — two things that fracking proponents claim to take into consideration, but clearly not seriously enough.

Fracking comments delivered to the Delaware River Basin CommissionEnvironmentalists delivered over 36,000 public comments to the Delaware River Basin Commission in Ewing on Thursday, April 14, 2011, opposing natural gas drilling near the Delaware River. The comments come from residents of New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Delaware who oppose "fracking," a technique in which water, sand and toxic chemicals are injected to break up shale and release natural gas. Video by Martin Griff / The Times of Trenton